V. SENTHIL BALAJI vs. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR

Case Type: Criminal Appeal

Date of Judgment: 26-09-2024

Preview image for V. SENTHIL BALAJI vs. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR

Full Judgment Text

2024 INSC 739 Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.4011 OF 2024 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 3986 of 2024) V. Senthil Balaji            … Appellant versus The Deputy Director, Directorate of  Enforcement       ... Respondent J  U  D  G  M  E  N  T ABHAY S. OKA, J. FACTUAL ASPECTS Leave granted.  1. 2. This appeal takes exception to the judgment and order th dated 28  February 2024 passed by a learned Single Judge of the   High   Court   of   Judicature   at   Madras   by   which   a   bail application preferred by the appellant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been rejected.  The Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Anita Malhotra Date: 2024.09.26 13:46:17 IST Reason: bail application was filed in connection with an alleged offence under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 1 of 25 2002   (for   short,   ‘the   PMLA’),   which   is   punishable   under Section 4 of the PMLA.  Between 2011 and 2016, the appellant was holding the 3. post of Transport Minister in the Government of Tamil Nadu. Broadly,   the   allegation   against   the   appellant   is   that   while discharging his duties as a Minister, in connivance with his personal   assistant   and   his   brother,   he   collected   large amounts by promising job opportunities to several persons in various positions in the Transport Department. This led to the registering   of   three   First   Information   Reports   against   the appellant and others. The said First Information Reports are th FIR no.441 of 2015 dated 29  October 2015 (CC Nos. 22 and th 24 of 2021), FIR No.298 of 2017 registered on 9  September th 2017 (CC No.19 of 2020) and FIR no. 344 dated 13  August 2018 (CC No. 25 of 2020).  In the first FIR, six charge sheets have been filed.  More than 2000 accused have been named in the charge sheets. 550 witnesses have been named.  In the case of the second FIR, there are 14 accused named in the chargesheet.  In connection with this FIR, 24 witnesses have been cited. In the third FIR, 24 accused have been named in the charge  sheet and  50 prosecution  witnesses have been cited.  The offences alleged in the aforementioned crimes are mainly under Sections 120B, 419, 420, 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 7, 12, 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code has been invoked.   These offences are scheduled offences within the meaning of Section 2(y) of Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 2 of 25 the   PMLA.   Therefore,   relying   on   the   final   reports   filed   in aforementioned scheduled offences, for an offence of money laundering under Section 3 of the PMLA punishable under Section   4,   the   Enforcement   Directorate   (ED)   registered   an Enforcement   Case   Information   Report   (for   short   “ECIR”) th bearing ECIR No. MDSZO/21/2021 on 29  July 2021. th 4. The   appellant   was   arrested   on   14   June   2023   in connection with the said ECIR and was remanded to judicial custody.  A complaint was filed for the offence under Section 3 of the PMLA Act, which is punishable under Section 4, on th 12  August 2023.  The appellant is the only accused named in the complaint. Cognizance has been taken based on the complaint   by   the   Special   Court   under   the   PMLA.   The scheduled offences cases have been transferred to the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Additional Special Court for Trial of Criminal Cases related to Elected Members of Parliament and Members   of   Legislative   Assembly   of   Tamil   Nadu   (Special MPMLA Court), Chennai.  SUBMISSIONS 5. Learned   senior   counsel   appearing   in   support   of   the appeal   pointed   out   that   in   this   case,   ED   is   relying   upon material collected by the investigating agencies investigating the scheduled offences.  He submitted that five articles were th allegedly seized during the search on 6  February 2020 in the appellant's   premises.   He   invited   our   attention   to   the averments   made   in   the   complaint   and,   in   particular, Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 3 of 25 paragraph   no.14.5,   which   deals   with   incriminating documents relating to money collected for providing jobs in the posts of Drivers, Conductors, Junior Tradesmen, Junior Engineers, Assistant Engineers, etc.  He pointed out that the prosecution mainly relies upon a file named CS AC, allegedly found in the seized pen drive.  The file allegedly gives details regarding   the   amounts   received   against   each   post.     He submitted that the Tamil Nadu Forensic Science Laboratory (TNFSL)’s analysis of the seized pen drive shows that the said file CS AC was not found on the pen drive, and a file named csac.xlsx   was   found.     As   regards   the   allegation   of   the prosecution of the deposit of cash amount of Rs.1.34 crores in the   appellant's   bank   account,   the   learned   senior   counsel urged that said amount represents the income received by way of remuneration as MLA and agriculture income. Learned senior counsel submitted that in any event, all the documents and all relevant electronic evidence have been seized in the predicate   offences   and   statements   of   the   witnesses   under Section 50 of the PMLA have been recorded. He submitted that   the   appellant   has   undergone   incarceration   under   the PMLA Act for more than 14 months.  He pointed out that as far as three predicate offences are concerned, charges have not even been framed. There are more than 2000 accused and 600   prosecution   witnesses   in   the   predicate   offences   and therefore, there is no possibility of trial of scheduled offences getting over in the near future.  He submitted that unless the trials   pertaining   to   scheduled   offences   are   concluded,   the Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 4 of 25 complaint under the PMLA cannot  be finally decided.   He would, therefore, submit that there is no possibility of the trial for the PMLA offence concluding within five to six years and hence, the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail. The learned   senior   counsel   extensively   relied   upon   a   recent 1 decision of this Court in the case of   Manish Sisodia   and especially what is observed in paragraph 54. He submitted that   on   facts,   this   case   is   similar   to   the   case   of   Manish 1 .  He also relied upon a decision of this Court in the Sisodia 2 case of  . Union of India v. K.A. Najeeb The   learned   Solicitor   General   of   India   and   learned 6. counsel appearing for the E.D. have made separate detailed submissions.     The   first   submission   is   that   there   is   no discrepancy in the description of file name CS AC in the pen drive and the file name of the same file in the TNFSL report st dated 31  March 2023 ,  which shows collection of the sum of Rs. 67.74 crores by the appellant for providing employment in the various posts in the Transport Department.  He submitted that if the TNFSL report is perused, the document at Sr.No.24 has the same name, CS AC. He submitted that the portion “.xlsx” is only a file extension, which signifies that it is a Microsoft Excel sheet.   He submitted that a printout of the Microsoft Excel spreadsheet file with the name CS AC found in the seized pen drive was certified by the Special MPMLA Court ,  which is relied upon in the complaint.  He submitted 1 ( 2024) SCC OnLine SC 1920 2 (2021) 3 SCC 713. Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 5 of 25 that at this stage, there is no reason to doubt the correctness of   the   printout   of   the   file   CS   AC   provided   by   the   Special MPMLA Court. The learned counsel appearing for ED also pointed out that there is no discrepancy in the seizure of the H.P.   hard   disk.   The   learned   counsel   submitted   that   the salary/remuneration payable to MLAs is directly credited to the bank account of the concerned MLAs. Therefore, there is no question of any cash amount being received on the said count.  He pointed out that the appellant claims that there is a   cash   deposit   of   salary   to   the   tune   of   68   lakhs   in   his account.  He also pointed out that the appellant's agricultural income between 2014 and 2020 is to the tune of Rs. 20.24 lakhs, and therefore, the justification that a substantial part of the deposit of Rs.1.34 crores is his agricultural income must be rejected.  Learned counsel pointed out that there is an unexplained cash deposit of Rs. 20.24 lakhs even in the appellant's wife's account.  Learned   counsel   also   pointed   out   other   documentary 7. evidence   indicating   the   appellant's   involvement   in   the   job racket scam, including the file AC1.xlsx.  He pointed out that there is sufficient material on record to show that the posts of Drivers, Conductors, Junior Assistants and Technicians were priced and sold at Rs.1.5 lakhs, Rs.2.0 lakhs, Rs.1.25 lakhs and   Rs.4   lakhs,   respectively.     He   submitted   that   there   is material on record to show that an amount of at least Rs.38 crores   was   collected   from   candidates   by   giving   them   the promise of providing jobs.  He submitted that there are a large Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 6 of 25 number of email communications indicating more than  prima facie   material  about  the   involvement   of   the  appellant.  His submission is that, in fact, the twin conditions under clause (ii) of sub­section (1) of Section 45 of the PMLA have not been satisfied in this case.  8. The Learned Solicitor General of India pointed out that three rounds of litigations have travelled to this Court arising out of scheduled offences.  He pointed out that the decisions of this Court indicate how the complainants were won over and how a so­called compromise between the complainants and the accused was brought about.  He submitted that the appellant had been a minister for a long time in the Tamil Nadu government. He pointed out that he continued to be a Minister without portfolio, even during the first few months of his   detention,   and   that   he   continues   to   be   a   Member   of Legislative Assembly (MLA).  9. He   submitted   that   observations   made   by   this   Court indicate   that   the   appellant   will   be   able   to   influence   the witnesses if he is enlarged on bail.  Learned Solicitor General relied   upon   a   decision   of   this   Court   in   the   case   of   P. 3 Dharamraj v. Shanmugam and others .  He submitted that the   High   Court’s   decision   to   quash   one   of   the   scheduled offences based on an alleged compromise between bribe givers and  bribe  recipients  was   under  scrutiny   in  the  case.    He pointed   out   that   this   Court   heavily   came   down   on   such 3 (2022) 15 SCC 136 Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 7 of 25 compromises   in   the   said   decision.   He   relied   upon   various paragraphs   of   the   said   decision.   He   submitted   that   the argument of learned senior counsel for the appellant in the said   case   that   one   Shri   Shanmugam,   who   is   allegedly involved, was not his personal assistant, has been expressly rejected.  This Court found that he was working as a personal assistant of the appellant.  10. Learned SG relied upon a decision of this Court in the 4 case   of   Y.   Balaji   v.   Karthik   Desari   and   Another .    He pointed out observations made from paragraph 17 onwards of the said decision.   He pointed out that this Court objected strongly to not registering offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.  He pointed out the observations of this Court   regarding   the   compromise   entered   in   the   scheduled offence. It was observed that two teams were created just for the record, and an investigation was carried out as if it were a friendly match between the complainants and the accused. This Court further observed that it was only because of the position of the appellant as a Minister that the complainants purported to enter into a compromise.   He submitted that there is very strong material on record to show the appellant's involvement in the offence punishable under Section 4 of the PMLA  and   the   predicate   offences.     He   submitted   that   the appellant brought about such an illegal settlement between bribe   givers   and   bribe   receivers.     Therefore,   there   is   no manner of doubt that once he comes out, he will influence the 4 (2023) SCC OnLine SC 645 Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 8 of 25 witnesses proposed to be examined by the prosecution, as he wields considerable influence in the State due to his political clout. 11. He submitted that though there are a large number of accused   and   witnesses   in   the   scheduled   offences,   if   a competent special public prosecutor is appointed, perhaps the prosecution may be in a position to drop a large number of witnesses.  He submitted that in Misc. Application no.1381 of 2024 arising out of the decision of this Court in Criminal Appeal no.1677 of 2023, there is already a prayer made for the appointment of a special public prosecutor. 12. We   have   also   heard   learned   senior   counsel   for   the intervenors who supported the ED. CONSIDERATION OF SUBMISSIONS 13. We   have   carefully   considered   the   submissions.   The main document relied upon by the ED showing incriminatory material against the appellant is a part of the pen drive seized by   the   State   police   from   the   appellant's   premises   in connection   with   scheduled   offences.   The   concerned   Court dealing with the scheduled offences has provided the printed version of the soft files in the seized pen drive.  There is no reason, at this stage, to doubt the authenticity of the soft files.  There is also prima facie material to show a deposit of cash   amount   of   Rs.1.34   crores   in   the   appellant's   bank account.     At   this   stage,   the   contention   of   the   appellant Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 9 of 25 regarding the deposit of remuneration received as MLA and agriculture income cannot be accepted in the absence of any prima facie  evidence to show the existence of the appellant's cash income as MLA and the appellant's agriculture income. Therefore, at this stage, it will be very difficult to hold that there   is   no   prima   facie   case   against   the   appellant   in   the complaint under Section 44 (1)(b) of the PMLA and material relied upon therein. EFFECT OF THE DELAY IN DISPOSAL OF THE CASES 14. As of now, the appellant has been incarcerated for more than 15 months in connection with the offence punishable under Section 4 of the PMLA. The minimum punishment for an offence punishable under Section 4 is imprisonment for three   years,   which   may   extend   to   seven   years.     If   the scheduled offences are under paragraph 2 of Part A of the Schedule in the PMLA, the sentence may extend to 10 years. In the appellant’s case, the maximum sentence can be of 7 years as there is no scheduled offence under paragraph 2 of Part A of Schedule II alleged against the appellant.  15. We have already narrated that there are three scheduled offences.  In the main case (CC Nos. 22 and 24 of 2021), there are about 2000 accused and 550 prosecution witnesses cited. Thus, it can be said that there are more than 2000 accused in the three scheduled offences, and the number of witnesses proposed to be examined exceeds 600. Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 10 of 25 16. This Bench is also dealing with MA no.1381 of 2024 seeking various reliefs such as a transfer of investigation of scheduled offences, appointment of special public prosecutor etc.   The orders passed in the said application would reveal that the sanction to prosecute all public servants, including the appellant, has now been granted.  Charges have not been framed in the scheduled offences.  17. Thus, on the issue of framing of charge or discharge, a large number of accused will have to be heard.  The trial of the scheduled offences will be a warrant case. Therefore, even if   the   trials   of   the   scheduled   offences   are   expedited,   the process of framing charges may take a few months as many advocates representing more than 2000 accused persons will have to be heard. There are bound to be further proceedings arising out of orders on charge. After that, more than 600 witnesses   will   have   to   be   examined.     Documentary   and electronic evidence is relied upon in the scheduled offences. Even if few witnesses are dropped, a few hundred witnesses will have to be examined. Presence of all the accused will have to be procured and their statements under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 will have to be recorded. Therefore, even in ideal conditions, the possibility of the trial of scheduled offences concluding even within a reasonable time of three to four years appears to be completely ruled out. 18. In the offence under the PMLA, the charge has not been framed.  In view of Clause (d) of sub­section (1) of Section 44 Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 11 of 25 of   PMLA,   the   procedure   for   sessions   trial   will   have   to   be followed for the prosecution of an offence punishable under Section 4 of the PMLA.  In view of clause (c) of sub­section (1) of   Section   44,   it   is   possible   to   transfer   the   trial   of   the scheduled offences to the Special Court under the PMLA. 19. The offence of money laundering has been defined under Section 3 of the PMLA which reads thus: “ 3.   Offence   of   money­laundering .— Whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to   indulge   or   knowingly   assists   or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected with the   [proceeds   of   crime   including   its concealment,   possession,   acquisition   or use   and   projecting   or   claiming]   it   as untainted   property   shall   be   guilty   of offence of money­laundering.  [Explanation.—For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that,—  (i) a person shall be guilty of offence of money­laundering if such person is found to have directly or indirectly attempted to indulge   or   knowingly   assisted   or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in one or more of the following processes or   activities   connected   with   proceeds   of crime, namely:—  (a) concealment; or  (b) possession; or  (c) acquisition; or  (d) use; or  Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 12 of 25 (e) projecting as untainted property; or  (f) claiming as untainted property, in any manner whatsoever;  (ii) the process or activity connected with proceeds of crime is a continuing activity and continues till such time a person is directly or indirectly enjoying the proceeds of crime by its concealment or possession or acquisition or use or projecting it as untainted   property   or   claiming   it   as untainted   property   in   any   manner whatsoever.]  20. Existence of proceeds of crime is a condition precedent for the offence under Section 3.  Proceeds of crime have been defined in Section 2(u) of the PMLA which reads thus: “2  ……………………………………………  (u)   “ proceeds   of   crime ”   means   any property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result  of criminal  activity   relating  to   a  scheduled offence or the value of any such property or where such property is taken or held outside   the   country,   then   the   property equivalent   in   value   held   within   the country [or abroad];  Explanation.—For the removal of doubts, it   is   hereby   clarified   that   "proceeds   of crime" include property not only derived or   obtained   from   the   scheduled   offence but also any property which may directly or indirectly be derived or obtained as a result of any criminal activity relatable to the scheduled offence; Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 13 of 25 21. Hence, the existence of a scheduled offence is  sine qua non  for alleging the existence of proceeds of crime. A property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by a person as a result of the criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence constitutes proceeds of crime.   The existence of proceeds of crime at the time of the trial of the offence under Section 3 of PMLA   can   be   proved   only   if   the   scheduled   offence   is established   in   the   prosecution   of   the   scheduled   offence. Therefore,   even   if   the   trial   of   the   case   under   the   PMLA proceeds,   it   cannot   be   finally   decided   unless   the   trial   of scheduled offences concludes. In the facts of the case, there is no   possibility   of   the   trial   of   the   scheduled   offences commencing   in   the   near   future.     Therefore,   we   see   no possibility of both trials concluding within a few years. 2 22. In the case of  , in paragraph 17 this Court K.A. Najeeb held thus:  It   is   thus   clear   to   us   that   the “17. presence   of   statutory   restrictions   like Section 43­D(5) of the UAPA per se does not oust the ability of the constitutional courts   to   grant   bail   on   grounds   of violation of Part III of the Constitution. Indeed,   both   the   restrictions   under   a statute   as   well   as   the   powers exercisable   under   constitutional jurisdiction   can   be   well   harmonised. Whereas   at   commencement   of proceedings, the courts are expected to   appreciate   the   legislative   policy against grant of bail but the rigours of   such   provisions   will   melt   down Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 14 of 25 where there is no likelihood of trial being completed within a reasonable time and the period of incarceration already   undergone   has   exceeded   a substantial   part   of   the   prescribed sentence.   Such   an   approach   would safeguard   against   the   possibility   of provisions like Section 43­D(5) of the UAPA being used as the sole metric for   denial   of   bail   or   for   wholesale breach   of   constitutional   right   to speedy trial.”                (emphasis added) 23. In   the   case   of   Manish   Sisodia   v.   Directorate   of 1 Enforcement  in paragraphs 49 to 57, this Court held thus: “49.   We find that, on account of a long period   of   incarceration   running   for around 17 months and the trial even not having   been   commenced,   the   appellant has been deprived of his right to speedy trial. 50.  As observed by this Court, the right to speedy   trial   and   the   right   to   liberty   are sacrosanct rights. On denial of these rights, the   trial   court   as   well   as   the   High   Court ought to have given due weightage to this factor. 51.  Recently, this Court had an occasion to consider an application for bail in the case of   v.  Javed   Gulam   Nabi   Shaikh State   of 6 Maharashtra  wherein   the   accused   was prosecuted   under   the   provisions   of the Unlawful   Activities   (Prevention)   Act, Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 15 of 25
1967. This Court surveyed the entire law<br>right from the judgment of this Court in the<br>cases of Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public<br>Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra<br>Pradesh7, Shri Gurbaksh Singh<br>Sibbia v. State of Punjab8, Hussainara<br>Khatoon (I) v. Home Secretary, State of<br>Bihar9, Union of India v. K.A.<br>Najeeb10 and Satender Kumar<br>Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation11. The<br>Court observed thus:
“19. If the State or any prosecuting<br>agency including the court concerned<br>has no wherewithal to provide or<br>protect the fundamental right of an<br>accused to have a speedy trial as<br>enshrined under Article 21 of<br>the Constitution then the State or any<br>other prosecuting agency should not<br>oppose the plea for bail on the ground<br>that the crime committed is serious.<br>Article 21 of the Constitution applies<br>irrespective of the nature of the crime.”
52. The Court also reproduced the<br>observations made in Gudikanti<br>Narasimhulu (supra), which read thus:
“10. In the aforesaid context, we may<br>remind the trial courts and the High<br>Courts of what came to be observed by<br>this Court in Gudikanti<br>Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor, High<br>Court reported in (1978) 1 SCC 240.<br>We quote:
Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 16 of 25
“What is often forgotten, and therefore<br>warrants reminder, is the object to keep<br>a person in judicial custody pending<br>trial or disposal of an appeal. Lord<br>Russel, C.J., said [R v. Rose, (1898) 18<br>Cox]:
“I observe that in this case bail was<br>refused for the prisoner. It cannot be<br>too strongly impressed on the,<br>magistracy of the country that bail is<br>not to be withheld as a punishment, but<br>that the requirements as to bail are<br>merely to secure the attendance of the<br>prisoner at trial.””
53. The Court further observed that, over<br>a period of time, the trial courts and the<br>High Courts have forgotten a very well­<br>settled principle of law that bail is not to<br>be withheld as a punishment. From our<br>experience, we can say that it appears that<br>the trial courts and the High Courts attempt<br>to play safe in matters of grant of bail. The<br>principle that bail is a rule and refusal is an<br>exception is, at times, followed in breach.<br>On account of non­grant of bail even in<br>straight forward open and shut cases, this<br>Court is flooded with huge number of bail<br>petitions thereby adding to the huge<br>pendency. It is high time that the trial<br>courts and the High Courts should recognize<br>the principle that “bail is rule and jail is<br>exception”.
54. In the present case, in the ED matter<br>as well as the CBI matter, 493 witnesses
Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 17 of 25 have   been   named.   The   case   involves thousands   of   pages   of   documents   and over a lakh pages of digitized documents. It is thus clear that there is not even the remotest   possibility   of   the   trial   being concluded in the near future. In our view, keeping the appellant behind the bars for an unlimited period of time in the hope of   speedy   completion   of   trial   would deprive his fundamental right to liberty under   Article 21 of   the Constitution.   As observed time and again, the prolonged incarceration   before   being   pronounced guilty   of   an   offence   should   not   be permitted to become punishment without trial. 55.  As observed by this Court in the case of  Gudikanti   Narasimhulu  (supra),   the objective to keep a person in judicial custody pending trial or disposal of an appeal is to secure   the   attendance   of   the   prisoner   at trial.  In   the   present   case,   the   appellant   is 56. having deep roots in the society. There is no possibility   of   him   fleeing   away   from   the country and not being available for facing the   trial.   In   any   case,   conditions   can   be imposed to address the concern of the State.  Insofar as the apprehension given by the 57. learned   ASG   regarding   the   possibility   of tampering the evidence is concerned, it is to be noted that the case largely depends on documentary   evidence   which   is   already seized by the prosecution. As such, there is Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 18 of 25
no possibility of tampering with the<br>evidence. Insofar as the concern with regard<br>to influencing the witnesses is concerned,<br>the said concern can be addressed by<br>imposing stringent conditions upon the<br>appellant.
……………………………………….”
(emphasis added)
24. There are a few penal statutes that make a departure from the provisions of Sections 437, 438, and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.  A higher threshold is provided in these statutes for the grant of bail.  By way of illustration, we may refer to Section 45(1)(ii) of PMLA, proviso to Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and Section   37   of   the   Narcotic   Drugs   and   Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, ‘NDPS Act’).  The provisions regarding bail in some of such statutes start with a non­ obstante clause for overriding the provisions of Sections 437 to 439 of the CrPC.  The legislature has done so to secure the object of making the penal provisions in such enactments. For example, the PMLA provides for Section 45(1)(ii) as money laundering poses a serious threat not only to the country's financial system but also to its integrity and sovereignty.  25. Considering the gravity of the offences in such statutes, expeditious   disposal   of   trials   for   the   crimes   under   these statutes   is   contemplated.   Moreover,   such   statutes   contain provisions laying down higher threshold for the grant of bail. The   expeditious   disposal   of   the   trial   is   also   warranted Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 19 of 25 considering   the   higher  threshold   set   for   the  grant   of   bail. Hence, the requirement of expeditious disposal of cases must be   read   into   these   statutes.     Inordinate   delay   in   the conclusion of the trial and the higher threshold for the grant of bail cannot go together.   It is a well­settled principle of our criminal jurisprudence that “bail is the rule, and jail is the exception.” These stringent provisions regarding the grant of bail, such as Section 45(1)(iii) of the PMLA, cannot become a tool which can be used to incarcerate the accused without trial for an unreasonably long time.  26. There are a series of decisions of this Court starting 2 from the decision in the case of  K.A. Najeeb , which hold that such stringent provisions for the grant of bail do not take away the power of Constitutional Courts to grant bail on the grounds of violation of Part III of the Constitution of India. We have already referred to paragraph 17 of the said decision, which lays down that the rigours of such provisions will melt down where there is no likelihood of trial being completed in a reasonable   time   and   the   period   of   incarceration   already undergone has exceeded a substantial part of the prescribed sentence.   One of the reasons is that if, because of such provisions,   incarceration   of   an   undertrial   accused   is continued for an unreasonably long time, the provisions may be exposed to the vice of being violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.   Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 20 of 25 27. Under the Statutes like PMLA, the minimum sentence is three years, and the maximum is seven years.  The minimum sentence is higher when the scheduled offence is under the NDPS Act. When the trial of the complaint under PMLA is likely to prolong beyond reasonable limits, the Constitutional Courts will have to consider exercising their powers to grant bail.     The   reason   is   that   Section   45(1)(ii)   does   not   confer power on the State to detain an accused for an unreasonably long   time,   especially   when   there   is   no   possibility   of   trial concluding within a reasonable time. What a reasonable time is will depend on the provisions under which the accused is being tried and other factors.  One of the most relevant factor is the duration of the minimum and maximum sentence for the offence.   Another important consideration is the higher threshold or stringent conditions which a statute provides for the grant of bail. Even an outer limit provided by the relevant law for the completion of the trial, if any, is also a factor to be considered. The extraordinary powers, as held in the case of 2 , can only  be  exercised  by  the Constitutional K.A.  Najeeb Courts. The Judges of the Constitutional Courts have vast experience.     Based   on   the   facts   on   record,   if   the   Judges conclude that there is no possibility of a trial concluding in a reasonable time, the power of granting bail can always be exercised   by   the   Constitutional   Courts   on   the   grounds   of violation   of   Part   III   of   the   Constitution   of   India notwithstanding the statutory provisions. The Constitutional Courts can always exercise its jurisdiction under Article 32 or Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 21 of 25 Article 226, as the case may be. The Constitutional Courts have to bear in mind while dealing with the cases under the PMLA that, except in a few exceptional cases, the maximum sentence can be of seven years.   The Constitutional Courts cannot   allow   provisions   like   Section   45(1)(ii)   to   become instruments in the hands of the ED to continue incarceration for a long time when there is no possibility of a trial of the scheduled offence and the PMLA offence concluding within a reasonable time.  If the Constitutional Courts do not exercise their jurisdiction in such cases, the rights of the undertrials under Article 21 of the Constitution of India will be defeated. In a given case, if an undue delay in the disposal of the trial of scheduled offences or disposal of trial under the PMLA can be substantially   attributed   to   the   accused,   the   Constitutional Courts can always decline to exercise jurisdiction to issue prerogative writs. An exception will also be in a case where, considering the antecedents of the accused, there is every possibility of the accused becoming a real threat to society if enlarged on bail. The jurisdiction to issue prerogative writs is always discretionary.   Some   day,   the   courts,   especially   the   Constitutional 28. Courts, will have to take a call on a peculiar situation that arises in our justice delivery system.  There are cases where clean   acquittal   is   granted   by   the   criminal   courts   to   the accused after very long incarceration as an undertrial.  When we say clean acquittal, we are excluding the cases where the witnesses have turned hostile or there is a bona fide defective Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 22 of 25 investigation.  In such cases of clean acquittal, crucial years in the life of the accused are lost.     In a given case, it may amount to violation of rights of the accused under Article 21 of   the   Constitution   which   may   give   rise   to   a   claim   for compensation. 29. As stated earlier, the appellant has been incarcerated for 15 months or more for the offence punishable under the PMLA.   In the facts of the case, the trial of the scheduled offences and, consequently, the PMLA offence is not likely to be   completed   in   three   to   four   years   or   even   more.   If   the appellant's   detention   is   continued,   it   will   amount   to   an infringement of his fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India of speedy trial.   30. The decisions the learned SG relied upon indicate that the   appellant's   influential   position   in   the   State   may   have resulted in a so­called compromise between the bribe givers and the bribe takers. Considering the apprehension of the appellant tampering with the evidence, stringent conditions must be imposed. 31. Therefore, the appeal is allowed, and the appellant shall be enlarged on bail till the final disposal of CC No. 9 of 2023 pending before the Principal Session Judge, Chennai, on the following conditions:  Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 23 of 25 a. The appellant shall furnish bail bonds in the sum of Rs.25,00,000/­ (Rupees twenty­five lakhs only) with two sureties in the like amount; b. The appellant shall not directly or indirectly attempt to contact or communicate with the prosecution witnesses and   victims   of   the   three   scheduled   offences   in   any manner.   If it is found that the appellant directly or indirectly   made   even   an   attempt   to   contact   any prosecution witness or victim in the scheduled as well as   offences   under   the   PMLA,   it   will   be   a   ground   to cancel the bail granted to the appellant; The appellant shall mark his attendance every Monday c. and Friday between 11 am and 12 noon in the office of the Deputy Director, the Directorate of Enforcement at Chennai.  He shall also appear on the first Saturday of every calendar month before the investigating officers of the three scheduled offences; Before   the   appellant   is   enlarged   on   bail,   he   shall d. surrender his passport to the Special Court under the PMLA at Chennai; e. The   appellant   shall   regularly   and   punctually   remain present   before   the   Courts   dealing   with   scheduled offences as well as the Special Court and shall cooperate with the Courts for early disposal of cases; and Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 24 of 25 f. If the appellant seeks adjournments on non­existing or frivolous   grounds   or   creates   hurdles   in   the   early disposal of the cases mentioned above, the bail granted to him shall be liable to be cancelled. 32. The appeal is allowed on the above terms. ...…………………………….J. (Abhay S Oka) ..…………………………….J.                                                        (Augustine George Masih) New Delhi; September 26, 2024. Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl) No.3986 of 2024                       Page 25 of 25